New Delhi, 11 May (H.S.): Indian star women’s wrestler Vinesh Phogat has strongly contested the Show‑Cause Notice and competition ban issued by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI), calling the federation’s interpretation of her sabbatical and return schedule “incorrect.” She clarified that she has already been officially cleared to resume training and competitions from 1 January 2026.

In a detailed social‑media post on Monday, Vinesh stated she is fully eligible to participate in tournaments because the WFI has misunderstood the timeline and conditions of her break and subsequent comeback from the sport.

She explained that international anti‑doping processes, monitored by the International Testing Agency (ITA)—which is appointed by the global governing body United World Wrestling (UWW)—had formally recognised her return window. Citing ITA’s official confirmation, she said she is considered eligible to resume official training and competition from 1 January 2026, contradicting the 26 June 2026 cut‑off date mentioned in the WFI notice.

The WFI had issued a 15‑page Show‑Cause Notice against the Asian Games gold medallist, accusing her of indiscipline and alleged violations of anti‑doping regulations and declaring her ineligible to compete in domestic events until 26 June 2026. This came after Vinesh vowed to return to competitive wrestling at the 2026 Senior Open Ranking Tournament for the 57‑kg category at Nandini Nagar campus in Gonda, which was organised shortly after the Paris Olympics.

Open Ranking Tournament scheduled from 10–12 May 2026, effectively delaying her competitive comeback.

In the 15‑page notice, the WFI also flagged the incident at the Paris Olympics, where Vinesh reached the 50‑kg final but was later disqualified for failing to make weight on the next day. The federation argued that under UWW anti‑doping and weight‑management rules, she was “duty‑bound” to maintain the required limit and that her ineligibility caused both loss of a medal and reputational damage to Indian wrestling.

Vinesh, however, has not acknowledged this narrative and has instead focused on the timing and legality of her return, rather than the on‑day‑of‑competition weight issue.

In her statement, Vinesh said she will, after consulting with her legal advisors and team, file a detailed point‑by‑point reply to the WFI notice within the stipulated 14 days. However, she has already used the social‑media platform to pre‑empt key points and publicly assert her eligibility.

She reiterated that she has not violated any anti‑doping rules and that her conduct throughout the 2024–2026 cycle has been in line with sport‑specific regulations.

The WFI’s notice also cited two incidents:

-A “whereabouts failure” in September 2024, and

-A “missed test” in December 2025.

Vinesh has countered that in both cases, she fully cooperated with the relevant authorities and management officials and that neither incident amounts to an anti‑doping rule violation under the National Anti‑Doping Rules 2021 or the WADA Code 2021.

Another major allegation in the WFI notice is that Vinesh participated in two different weight categories at the 2024 selection trials held at NIS Patiala, breaching UWW and federation rules.

Vinesh has categorically denied any wrongdoing, asserting that the ad‑hoc committee then running the WFI was fully aware of her participation in two categories and raised no objection at the time. She claims she was explicitly allowed to compete in both events, making the current allegation retrospective and unjust.

On the basis of the ITA‑backed eligibility date of 1 January 2026, Vinesh has declared that she is entitled to compete in the National Open Ranking Tournament in Gonda (10–12 May 2026). She has already completed her registration for the event and intends to use it as her competitive return to the mat.

Her public statement underscores that the core dispute now lies in interpreting cut‑off dates, sabbatical conditions and anti‑doping compliance, with one side seeing violations and the other seeing a clear, internationally recognised schedule of return. Either the federation will revise its stance or the case will escalate to formal hearings and possibly appeal bodies such as the National Anti‑Doping Disciplinary Panel (NADDP) or even CAS‑style forums.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Jun Sarkar